Comcast defends Time Warner Cable deal as U.S. review kicks off

Comments (13)
Overcast451 wrote:

“In Tuesday’s filing, Comcast argues that such concerns are unwarranted, especially given the growing competitiveness of both the video and the Internet markets.”

Well, I hope they grow FAST in this area then – because right now, Time Warner is about it for fast internet in the Cincinnati region. There is Fiber available in some limited areas, but not enough to give the Cable Company decent competition. I can only hope that Fiber is available in most of the area, should this deal go through.

Apr 08, 2014 11:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Vertigo wrote:

It is interesting/alarming to see how quickly Congress can organize a hearing for these big boys while other weighty subjects, like Campaign Finance Reform, languish there for decades.

The U.S. touts democracy to the rest of the world but corporatocracy is firmly in control. Taxation without any tangible representation.

It is a bold faced lie to claim that the Comcast/Time-Warner deal is intended to help the combined companies compete against new entrants like Google. In fact it is intended to lock out any new entrants/competition.

Provision of Internet access should be provided, for the public benefit, similarly to the Interstate highway system. One system providing the fastest/highly reliable access at the lowest possible cost for everyone. The public fully reaps all economies of scale, rather than corporations.

Individuals can then decide which content that they might want to purchase from whomever rather than be forced into the cable company’s “bundle”.

Apr 08, 2014 11:46am EDT  --  Report as abuse
NoFauxNews wrote:

In the beginning…Cable Co.’s got exclusive licenses to market in cities. The process help them establish themselves and pay for the huge infrastructure requirements. Prices remained high enough for Satellite Co.’s to enter the market and compete decades later. That means the Cable Co’s overcharged consumers for years!

Now, the regulators are considering giving more market power to these $80/mo Internet access thieves! They are playing us via large political bribes…I mean campaign contributions.

Apr 08, 2014 12:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dichotomous wrote:

I don’t know of anywhere where the public has a choice of which cable company to use. You can currently choose between Dish and Direct (until their merger goes through), but not cable. Nothing these companies do will benefit the public, that’s simply delusional. But elected officials don’t care about the public, so I guess our opinions will once again be ignored.

Apr 08, 2014 12:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Harry079 wrote:

Overcast451 if Comcast Xfinity come to your area you will more than likely spend more time on the phone agruing about your bill than enjoying that high speed internet.

Apr 08, 2014 12:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sjfella wrote:

BS! Conglomerates are never a good thing for consumers. Never!

Apr 08, 2014 1:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Comcast is by far the worst cable company I’ve ever had. My first X1 dvr lasted a week, the replacement died literally 5 minutes after the installer left, and the old school dvr I replaced the X1 with died about two weeks ago, so I’m now on on my 4th dvr. I also had an HD cable box die too but I never replaced it because I’m tired of replacing Comcast hardware.

I’ve had so many negative experiences with Comcast that I’ve written to the FCC and the local city council to complain.

Comcast charges more for less. I can get twice as many channels that I like to watch on Dish, for example, for the same money.

They have no competition where I live so their arguments are spurious at best. I, too, believe that the merger is clearly intended to stifle competition, not bolster it.

Please take a few moments to let the FCC know what you think about this proposed merger, thanks to companies like Comcast, it’s the only way we as consumers have left to make our voices heard. There’s also a White House petition you can sign, too, if you feel strongly enough.

Apr 08, 2014 3:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Burns0011 wrote:

Apple is not in the business of providing internet service. Google Fiber is a new entry, but at the same time, Google Fiber is a very limited area service.

Expanding Google Fiber is going to be difficult, because of all the ‘local monopoly’ contracts the existing internet / cable service providers have.

So this is a false argument and a lie coming from Comcast and Time Warner.

Apr 08, 2014 3:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
wrsprow wrote:

Doesn’t matter much to me. Both Comcast and TimeWarner are essentially useless unless one or the other is the only game in town.

Apr 08, 2014 6:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
OneCitizen wrote:

I can remember when there were laws in the US to protect citizens against deals like this. But then again, there were also laws to prevent banks from becoming too big to fail.
I guess we don’t need those laws anymore.

Apr 08, 2014 6:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
OneCitizen wrote:

I can remember when there were laws in the US to protect citizens against deals like this. But then again, there were also laws to prevent banks from becoming too big to fail.
I guess we don’t need those laws anymore.

Apr 08, 2014 6:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gotip wrote:

Only going to make things worse for the consumer. I am forced to have internet through Comcast. I have my own modem and the charge is $65 a month. I don’t use cable tv because of the cost. Now they have bought out the rights to more baseball games so I won’t even get to see my team play once a week. As soon as I find a better option I am done with Comcast for good.

Apr 08, 2014 6:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TomFoolious wrote:

Cohen said in more than 98 percent of the broadband markets served by Comcast and Time Warner Cable, customers have another Internet service choice offered by a top-ten telecom provider, delivered through fiber or new-generation DSL, plus newer entrants such as Google Fiber.

I must be in the 2%. Here in Dayton, OH, TWC is a monopoly. The only others we can get from my research is Cincinattin Bell, but their 10download/1upload plan costs $35/mo. For $35/mo. with TWC I can get 15down/1up, so that is never going to happen. Oh and TWC has recently raised their prices again. I do a lot of video game streaming, so to pursue this hobby I need a minimum upload speed of 3mb. That speed isn’t offered by Cincinnati Bell, showing that TWC is the only one in Dayton, Oh that I can go to if I want to enjoy my hobby. DSL is not an option as their internet service is bad for gaming despite having higher upload speeds. Nothing about this deal will be better for the American people. I also get frequently dropped internet connections that have existed ever since upgrading the internet speeds to get that upload speed. TWC has done the bare minimum to help me even with me threatening to switch to Cincinnati Bell. They know that Cinci Bell cannot compete, so they can get away with their crap shoot service. Please if there is anything decent that the rich bureaucrats can do this year, I hope it can be to save us from this terrible merger.

Apr 11, 2014 11:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.